Are the three truths meant to be read as a syllogism, or as three truths, that is to say, in the "three truths" is the "third" the conclusion of the other two (effectively superseding the first two)?

My own suspicions are that such is not the case, but I am open to whatever.

नस्वातो नापिपरतो नद्वाभ्यां नाप्यहेतुतः उत्पन्ना जातु विद्यन्ते भावाः क्वचन केचनThere absolutely are no things, nowhere and none, that arise anew, neither out of themselves, nor out of non-self, nor out of both, nor at random.सर्वं तथ्यं न वा तथ्यं तथ्यं चातथ्यम् एव च नैवातथ्यं नैव तथ्यम् एतद् बुद्धानुशासनम्All is so, or all is not so, both so and not so, neither so nor not so. This is the Buddha's teaching.一切實非實亦實亦非實
非實非非實是名諸佛法

Coëmgenu wrote:Are the three truths meant to be read as a syllogism, or as three truths, that is to say, in the "three truths" is the "third" the conclusion of the other two (effectively superseding the first two)?

My own suspicions are that such is not the case, but I am open to whatever.

If what you mean by Three Truths is what I wrote in another thread quoted from Zongmi On Chan, and also as the 'highest' teaching of Dzogchen, both are referring to the nature of mind, which is not the combined result of absolute truth and relative truth. Both Zongmi and Dzogchen teachings talk about this nature which is inherently pure, spontaneously illuminating everything.

Anonymous X wrote:
If what you mean by Three Truths is what I wrote in another thread quoted from Zongmi On Chan, and also as the 'highest' teaching of Dzogchen, both are referring to the nature of mind, which is not the combined result of absolute truth and relative truth. Both Zongmi and Dzogchen teachings talk about this nature which is inherently pure, spontaneously illuminating everything.

Anonymous X wrote:
If what you mean by Three Truths is what I wrote in another thread quoted from Zongmi On Chan, and also as the 'highest' teaching of Dzogchen, both are referring to the nature of mind, which is not the combined result of absolute truth and relative truth. Both Zongmi and Dzogchen teachings talk about this nature which is inherently pure, spontaneously illuminating everything.

Thanks. This is why I asked which Three Truths he was talking about. The OP and I had some discussion that I thought may have carried over from that thread. I'm not familiar enough with Tiantai to have recognized what he was probably referring to.

No, there is no combining or 'stages'. Tiantai/Tendai philosophy states: all phenomena are inherently empty, all phenomena are provisionally real and both are true at the same time. It's also known as 'the truth of the Middle."

In simple terms: I have a buddhanature which is empty, I have a female body which is provisionally true; both are true at the same time.
gassho
Rory

Namu Kanzeon Bosatsu
Chih-I:
The Tai-ching states "the women in the realms of Mara, Sakra and Brahma all neither abandoned ( their old) bodies nor received (new) bodies. They all received buddhahood with their current bodies (genshin)" Thus these verses state that the dharma nature is like a great ocean. No right or wrong is preached (within it) Ordinary people and sages are equal, without superiority or inferiority
Paul, Groner "The Lotus Sutra in Japanese Culture"eds. Tanabe p. 58https://www.tendai-usa.org/

Zhiyi compares the Perfect/Inclusive Three Truths to the three eyes of isvara - ؞ - each truth yields the other two. None can be said to be superior. If one truth is mentioned, the other two are implicit.If the third truth is emphasized or given more ultimate value your questions suggests, this would be Separate Teaching of the Exclusive/Separate Three Truths.

Those who, even with distracted minds,
Entered a stupa compound
And chanted but once, “Namo Buddhaya!”
Have certainly attained the path of the buddhas.
-Lotus Sutra, Expedient Means Chapter

There are beings with little dust in their eyes who are falling away because they do not hear the Dhamma. There will be those who will understand the Dhamma.
-Ayacana Sutta

Anonymous X wrote:
If what you mean by Three Truths is what I wrote in another thread quoted from Zongmi On Chan, and also as the 'highest' teaching of Dzogchen, both are referring to the nature of mind, which is not the combined result of absolute truth and relative truth. Both Zongmi and Dzogchen teachings talk about this nature which is inherently pure, spontaneously illuminating everything.

We need to discuss the differences between the Avatamsaka (Hua-yen/Kegon) and the Tiantai/Tendai school I dug out "Original Enlightenment" Jacqui Stone does a very good job of boiling such complex things down.

Zongmi (Tsung Mi) was a Hua-Yen/Avatamsaka/Kegon master and
"

Hua-yen thought sees all phenomena as expressions of an originally pure and undifferentiated one mind.....The teaching of the origination from suchness in effect grounds the arising of phenomena in the one pure mind and thus obliterates any ontological distinction between them

p7.

In contrast to the Hua-yen emphasis on all things arising from the mind, early T'ien t'ai....denies that the mind is a pure undiffentiated cosmic principle from which all things arise....For Chih-I, phenomena do not "arise" from princie\ple. Principle is that form and mind are always nondual and mutually inclusive; the "true aspect" (shih-hsiang) of all things

p.8

fun discussion!
gassho
Rory

Namu Kanzeon Bosatsu
Chih-I:
The Tai-ching states "the women in the realms of Mara, Sakra and Brahma all neither abandoned ( their old) bodies nor received (new) bodies. They all received buddhahood with their current bodies (genshin)" Thus these verses state that the dharma nature is like a great ocean. No right or wrong is preached (within it) Ordinary people and sages are equal, without superiority or inferiority
Paul, Groner "The Lotus Sutra in Japanese Culture"eds. Tanabe p. 58https://www.tendai-usa.org/

Anonymous X wrote:
If what you mean by Three Truths is what I wrote in another thread quoted from Zongmi On Chan, and also as the 'highest' teaching of Dzogchen, both are referring to the nature of mind, which is not the combined result of absolute truth and relative truth. Both Zongmi and Dzogchen teachings talk about this nature which is inherently pure, spontaneously illuminating everything.

We need to discuss the differences between the Avatamsaka (Hua-yen/Kegon) and the Tiantai/Tendai school I dug out "Original Enlightenment" Jacqui Stone does a very good job of boiling such complex things down.

Zongmi (Tsung Mi) was a Hua-Yen/Avatamsaka/Kegon master and
"

Hua-yen thought sees all phenomena as expressions of an originally pure and undifferentiated one mind.....The teaching of the origination from suchness in effect grounds the arising of phenomena in the one pure mind and thus obliterates any ontological distinction between them

p7.

In contrast to the Hua-yen emphasis on all things arising from the mind, early T'ien t'ai....denies that the mind is a pure undiffentiated cosmic principle from which all things arise....For Chih-I, phenomena do not "arise" from princie\ple. Principle is that form and mind are always nondual and mutually inclusive; the "true aspect" (shih-hsiang) of all things

p.8

fun discussion!
gassho
Rory

It seems to my simple way of looking at things, that both these views are more or less pointing to the same thing. What is there to discuss? Thinking about thinking?

Its actually a very significant difference. Not knowing enough about Kegon, and simply going on the blurb provided by Rory, the Kegon view would be considered Separate Teaching, or possibly Provisional Mahayana.

The Tientai view is radically decentralized - Ziporyn calls it "Omnicentric". Proposing a single source "mind" is idealistic and biased.

Those who, even with distracted minds,
Entered a stupa compound
And chanted but once, “Namo Buddhaya!”
Have certainly attained the path of the buddhas.
-Lotus Sutra, Expedient Means Chapter

There are beings with little dust in their eyes who are falling away because they do not hear the Dhamma. There will be those who will understand the Dhamma.
-Ayacana Sutta

Queequeg wrote:Its actually a very significant difference. Not knowing enough about Kegon, and simply going on the blurb provided by Rory, the Kegon view would be considered Separate Teaching, or possibly Provisional Mahayana.

The Tientai view is radically decentralized - Ziporyn calls it "Omnicentric". Proposing a single source "mind" is idealistic and biased.

I was referring to the comparison of Zongmi and Tientai, primarily Zhiyi. No two teachers will ever say 'exactly' the same thing in the same way.

Queequeg wrote:Its actually a very significant difference. Not knowing enough about Kegon, and simply going on the blurb provided by Rory, the Kegon view would be considered Separate Teaching, or possibly Provisional Mahayana.

The Tientai view is radically decentralized - Ziporyn calls it "Omnicentric". Proposing a single source "mind" is idealistic and biased.

I was referring to the comparison of Zongmi and Tientai, primarily Zhiyi. No two teachers will ever say 'exactly' the same thing in the same way.

Actually Anonymous I haven't looked at texts of Zhiyi but Japanese Tendai and Hua-yen thought are close:

Hua-yen Tamura [Yoshiro Tamura] says, moves from li to shih , emphasizing the exfoliation of particulars from the one mind, while T'ien -t'ai moves from shih to li, stressing that each particular as it stands encompassed the true aspect of reality. Thought their approaches differ, the two tradition addressed similar issues, and the similarity increased with mutual exchanges and borrowings from the latter T'ang period into the Sung.

Original Enlightenmentp.10

To state it in practical terms: Shingon buddhism begins with the Kongokai (Diamond World) mandala and then proceeds to the Taizokai (womb world/Lotus World) mandala, Tendai begins with the Taizo kai and then moves to the Kongokai.

he Taizōkai Mandala (Womb World) is associated with ultimate principle (ri 理) and the Kongōkai Mandala (Diamond World) with mind or intelligence (chi 智). Says the Digital Dictionary of Buddhism (sign in with user name = guest): “The two realms are fundamentally one, as are the absolute and phenomenal, e.g. water and wave. The Garbhadhātu (Womb World) representing the 理 and the 因 (principle and cause), the Vajradhātu (Diamond World) the 智 and the 果 intelligence/reason and the effect, i.e. the fundamental realm of being, and mind as inherent in it 胎 and 金剛.” <end DDB quote>

Even today, in many Japanese Shingon and Tendai temples, two large mandalas are typically mounted on wooden screens at right angles to the axis of the image platform. The mandala on the east side is the Kongōkai Mandala, and the mandala on the west side is the Taizōkai Mandala. The Kongōkai Mandala represents the cosmic or transcendental Buddha (aka Dainichi Nyorai and complete wisdom), while the Taizōkai mandala represents the world of physical phenomenon and ultimate principle (see below for details).

. Both Mandalas are playing an important role in Shingon practice. They can be understood in different ways. One way to understand them is like mapping reality from the relative, our, point of view, which is presented in the Taizo or matrix mandala and from the absolute or enlightened point of view in the Kongokai or diamond realm mandala. Both mandalas are not representing two different realities, but two different aspects of it, like the two sides of a coin

Queequeg, being a Nichiren buddhist you are not familiar with Tendai's esoteric teachings and yes, as the scholars pointed out they are similar just have different approaches...
gassho
Rory

Namu Kanzeon Bosatsu
Chih-I:
The Tai-ching states "the women in the realms of Mara, Sakra and Brahma all neither abandoned ( their old) bodies nor received (new) bodies. They all received buddhahood with their current bodies (genshin)" Thus these verses state that the dharma nature is like a great ocean. No right or wrong is preached (within it) Ordinary people and sages are equal, without superiority or inferiority
Paul, Groner "The Lotus Sutra in Japanese Culture"eds. Tanabe p. 58https://www.tendai-usa.org/

Coëmgenu wrote:Are the three truths meant to be read as a syllogism, or as three truths, that is to say, in the "three truths" is the "third" the conclusion of the other two (effectively superseding the first two)?

My own suspicions are that such is not the case, but I am open to whatever.

Zhiyi discusses 5 types of Three Truths in Fahua Hsuan-i (Profound Meaning of the Lotus Sutra). Swanson translates part of it in Tientai Philosophy, including the section where he describes 5 types of Three Truths.

Some of the inferior understandings of the Three Truths fit the Middle as syllogism. The Inclusive Threefold Truth of the Perfect and Spontaneous Teaching does not.

[First] With respect to those who enter the Distinct from the Shared [Teaching], the meaning of the threefold truth is fulfilled by combining "neither with outflow [of passions]" and 'nor without outflow [of passions]." "With outflows" refers to the mundane and "without outflows" refers to the real. "Neither with with outflows nor without outflows" refers to the Middle. In these teachings the Middle is discussed merely as different from emptiness and stops there. The Middle has no active function and does not include all dharmas.

[Second] The threefold truth of those who enter the Perfect from the Shared is not different in [its interpretation of] the two truths from the previous one. It is different from the previous [understanding of] the Middle, in the sense that "neither with outflows" and "nor without outflows" are combined and include all dharmas.

[Third] The threefold truth of the Distinct [Teaching] exposes the mundane as both truths and posits the Middle in opposition to the real. However,
it stops with the reality of the Middle.

[Fourth] The threefold truth of those who enter the Perfect from the Distinct is not different from the previous one in its interpretation of the two truths. It combines the real and the Middle as being included in Buddha Dharma.

[Fifth] The perfect threefold truth is that it is not only the Middle Path which completely includes the Buddha Dharma, but also the real and the mundane [truths]. This threefold truth is perfectly integrated; one-in-three and three-in-one.

Out of time now, but will add more later.

Those who, even with distracted minds,
Entered a stupa compound
And chanted but once, “Namo Buddhaya!”
Have certainly attained the path of the buddhas.
-Lotus Sutra, Expedient Means Chapter

There are beings with little dust in their eyes who are falling away because they do not hear the Dhamma. There will be those who will understand the Dhamma.
-Ayacana Sutta

rory wrote:
Queequeg, being a Nichiren buddhist you are not familiar with Tendai's esoteric teachings and yes, as the scholars pointed out they are similar just have different approaches...
gassho
Rory

Admission to a secret society is needed to understand an exoteric teaching? I don't think so.

I don't know what the scholars say, but if they propose that Tientai is about reducing reality to Mind, they're wrong.

“In Vasubandhu’s theory of consciousness-only, there is the one consciousness, but it is divided into the discriminating and the undiscriminating forms of consciousness; the discriminating consciousness is what we usually call consciousness, whereas the undiscriminating consciousness is “consciousness appearing to be an object”. All the physical objects in the universe – vases, clothing, carts, and carriages – are all this undiscriminating form of consciousness… But since they are all one nature, we can equally say that there are two forms of matter, the discriminating and the undiscriminating… It is in this sense that mind and matter are non-dual. Since he [Vasubandhu] is able to say there are these two different forms of consciousness, we can equally say they are two different forms of matter… In the Integrated Teaching, we can also say that all things are matter only, or sound only, or scent only, or flavor only, or tactile sensation only, or consciousness only. In sum, every dharma inherently includes all the dharmas throughout the dharma-realm.”

-Zhiyi, quoted in Evil and/or/as Good

As I wrote above, Zhiyi taught what Ziporyn styles, "Ominicentric Holism", hence his teaching begins and ends with the contemplation of reality by the observation of all dharmas in any dharma. Although there are discussions of sequential contemplation in Zhiyi's writings, going from the mundane, to the absolute, to the middle, this is not the Perfect Teaching - this is the Separate Teaching. The Perfect Teaching contemplation is not sequential - it is instantaneous and integrated.

I don't know what Shingon, or Kegon, or Tendai teach. And it really doesn't matter. Zhiyi appeared long before the Kongo-kai and Taizo-kai made their appearance in China. They weren't integrated into Tendai until later, in Japan, after Saicho was already dead.

Those who, even with distracted minds,
Entered a stupa compound
And chanted but once, “Namo Buddhaya!”
Have certainly attained the path of the buddhas.
-Lotus Sutra, Expedient Means Chapter

There are beings with little dust in their eyes who are falling away because they do not hear the Dhamma. There will be those who will understand the Dhamma.
-Ayacana Sutta

rory wrote:
Queequeg, being a Nichiren buddhist you are not familiar with Tendai's esoteric teachings and yes, as the scholars pointed out they are similar just have different approaches...
gassho
Rory

Admission to a secret society is needed to understand an exoteric teaching? I don't think so.

I don't know what the scholars say, but if they propose that Tientai is about reducing reality to Mind, they're wrong.

Well, there is Tendai vs Tiāntāi (and Tiāntāi vs the nascent works of its founders), and myriad stages of evolution for both.

The discourse on the mandalas reminds me of in Shingon, the "doctrine of the non-duality of the two mandalas" or something of the like, I think it was called, relating to the Diamond and Womb Realm mandalas. Did Tendai get this from cultural contact with Shingon, or is this the Tendai schools's own native system of interpretation of these mandalas that is different from Shingon discourse?

नस्वातो नापिपरतो नद्वाभ्यां नाप्यहेतुतः उत्पन्ना जातु विद्यन्ते भावाः क्वचन केचनThere absolutely are no things, nowhere and none, that arise anew, neither out of themselves, nor out of non-self, nor out of both, nor at random.सर्वं तथ्यं न वा तथ्यं तथ्यं चातथ्यम् एव च नैवातथ्यं नैव तथ्यम् एतद् बुद्धानुशासनम्All is so, or all is not so, both so and not so, neither so nor not so. This is the Buddha's teaching.一切實非實亦實亦非實
非實非非實是名諸佛法

Coëmgenu wrote:The discourse on the mandalas reminds me of in Shingon, the "doctrine of the non-duality of the two mandalas" or something of the like, I think it was called, relating to the Diamond and Womb Realm mandalas. Did Tendai get this from cultural contact with Shingon, or is this the Tendai schools's own native system of interpretation of these mandalas that is different from Shingon discourse?

Although I'm not an historian (and I'm not entirely sure what is being discussed in this thread) I can say for sure that the bulk of Tendai Taimitsu came from China. There were "borrowings" of texts from Shingon Shu, but often forgotten (or not realised) is that Shingon Shu also borrow from Tendai Taimitsu. It would seem that Tendai Taimitsu is often forgotten, ignored or viewed as inferior as Shingon Tomitsu. Tendai Taimitsu always stood in contrast to Shingon Tomitsu mostly because of the way Taimitsu has used the Lotus Sutra and Tientai doctrine in its interpretation of esoteric teachings.

If anyone wishes to understand why this might be I suggest reading "TAIMITSU: THE ESOTERIC BUDDHISM OF THE
TENDAI SCHOOL" by Lucia Dolce

As for Taimitsu and its relation to the Lotus Sutra, Annen wrote;

Question: The Tendai School considers the Lotus [Sutra] to be the ultimate teaching.… However, if the Lotus Sutra is considered to be ultimate, then Esoteric teachings should be provisional. If Esoteric teachings are ultimate, then the Lotus Sutra should be provisional. How can you say that they are identical?
Answer: The Lotus Sutra was preached through the acquired wisdom that everything that arises and ceases is the one-mind (issai ishinshiki 一切一心識)…. Esoteric teachings were preached in terms of the innate wisdom that everything is equal and is thus the one-mind (isshin isshinshiki 一心一心識)…. Thus according to Zhiyi, the mind, Buddha, and sentient beings are not distinct. The mind is all phenomena; all phenomena are the mind. They have neither a horizontal nor a vertical relationship. They are neither the same nor different. Even an instant of consciousness (keni isshin 芥爾一心) is replete with the three thousand realms. This is the Shingon School’s innate wisdom that everything is equal because all is the one-mind. (t 75.389c) Kyōji mondō 教時問答

Please note, that here "shingon" refers to Tendai Taimitsu, not Shingon Tomitsu - for a long time "shingon" was used for both Tendai Shu and Shingon Shu esoteric practices. The classification of Taimitsu/Tomitsu came later. For more info please see 'The Identity between the Purport of the Perfect and Esoteric Teachings' by Ōkubo Ryōshun

I'm aware that for Nichiren Buddhists, the incorporation of esoteric teachings and the reinterpretations that went along with it are seen as diluting/polluting the "true" teachings of Zhiyi, however, please note we are currently in the Tendai section of the forum, so naturally we are speaking from a Tendai perspective, not a Nichiren perspective. It should also be noted, that Saicho did indeed bring back esoteric teachings (though not fully) and did, from the start, implement them as part of his new Tendai school. Therefore, although not fully synthesized, there can be no doubt that esotericism was part of Japanese Tendai from the start.

Seishin wrote:It would seem that Tendai Taimitsu is often forgotten, ignored or viewed as inferior as Shingon Tomitsu.

Well, to be fair, Shingon has the benefit of being a far more "famous" school of Japan, with Tendai being something that less people even know about in Buddhism. I used to think that Tendai was the "Buddhist word" for Shinto, and that it was just the native "folk religion" of Japan "Buddha-tized". Obviously those are some pretty harsh misconceptions, but I got them due to, largely, what you are also talking about in what I quoted of you.

Similar also: the seperate practices of vipassanā & samatha in the Theravāda is much more famous than Mahāyāna unified practice of śamathavipaśyanā, and scholars often view the two in light of eachother.

नस्वातो नापिपरतो नद्वाभ्यां नाप्यहेतुतः उत्पन्ना जातु विद्यन्ते भावाः क्वचन केचनThere absolutely are no things, nowhere and none, that arise anew, neither out of themselves, nor out of non-self, nor out of both, nor at random.सर्वं तथ्यं न वा तथ्यं तथ्यं चातथ्यम् एव च नैवातथ्यं नैव तथ्यम् एतद् बुद्धानुशासनम्All is so, or all is not so, both so and not so, neither so nor not so. This is the Buddha's teaching.一切實非實亦實亦非實
非實非非實是名諸佛法

Queequeg wrote:Zhiyi appeared long before the Kongo-kai and Taizo-kai made their appearance in China. They weren't integrated into Tendai until later, in Japan, after Saicho was already dead.

To clarify, Seishin, I am not making any statement that is uniquely a Nichiren perspective. Rory brought up these mandalas and suggested... I'm not quite sure. I pointed out this historical fact. This does not in any manner suggest that Saicho's interpretation of the Buddhist curriculum was exclusive of esoteric teachings.

Those who, even with distracted minds,
Entered a stupa compound
And chanted but once, “Namo Buddhaya!”
Have certainly attained the path of the buddhas.
-Lotus Sutra, Expedient Means Chapter

There are beings with little dust in their eyes who are falling away because they do not hear the Dhamma. There will be those who will understand the Dhamma.
-Ayacana Sutta

Coëmgenu wrote: I used to think that Tendai was the "Buddhist word" for Shinto, and that it was just the native "folk religion" of Japan "Buddha-tized". Obviously those are some pretty harsh misconceptions, but I got them due to, largely, what you are also talking about in what I quoted of you.

Perhaps I am confused, but I don't understand what I could have said to make you believe that

Coëmgenu wrote: I used to think that Tendai was the "Buddhist word" for Shinto, and that it was just the native "folk religion" of Japan "Buddha-tized". Obviously those are some pretty harsh misconceptions, but I got them due to, largely, what you are also talking about in what I quoted of you.

Perhaps I am confused, but I don't understand what I could have said to make you believe that

Oh no no no no no. I meant when I was first interested in Buddhism several years ago that was my impression of the Tendai school from the wikipedia page and a World Religions textbook I had at the time, in younger days.

I was sharing that I understand where your post comes from. Its hard to find information about Tendai at all unless you are specifically looking for it. Tendai esotericism doesn't have the "exposure" Shingon esotericism does, he said, realizing the irony of what he just said.

नस्वातो नापिपरतो नद्वाभ्यां नाप्यहेतुतः उत्पन्ना जातु विद्यन्ते भावाः क्वचन केचनThere absolutely are no things, nowhere and none, that arise anew, neither out of themselves, nor out of non-self, nor out of both, nor at random.सर्वं तथ्यं न वा तथ्यं तथ्यं चातथ्यम् एव च नैवातथ्यं नैव तथ्यम् एतद् बुद्धानुशासनम्All is so, or all is not so, both so and not so, neither so nor not so. This is the Buddha's teaching.一切實非實亦實亦非實
非實非非實是名諸佛法

Coëmgenu wrote: I used to think that Tendai was the "Buddhist word" for Shinto, and that it was just the native "folk religion" of Japan "Buddha-tized". Obviously those are some pretty harsh misconceptions, but I got them due to, largely, what you are also talking about in what I quoted of you.

Perhaps I am confused, but I don't understand what I could have said to make you believe that

Oh no no no no no. I meant when I was first interested in Buddhism several years ago that was my impression of the Tendai school from the wikipedia page and a World Religions textbook I had at the time, in younger days.

I was sharing that I understand where your post comes from. Its hard to find information about Tendai at all unless you are specifically looking for it. Tendai esotericism doesn't have the "exposure" Shingon esotericism does, he said, realizing the irony of what he just said.

My partner informs me that my joke at the end is incomprehensible. Alas.

नस्वातो नापिपरतो नद्वाभ्यां नाप्यहेतुतः उत्पन्ना जातु विद्यन्ते भावाः क्वचन केचनThere absolutely are no things, nowhere and none, that arise anew, neither out of themselves, nor out of non-self, nor out of both, nor at random.सर्वं तथ्यं न वा तथ्यं तथ्यं चातथ्यम् एव च नैवातथ्यं नैव तथ्यम् एतद् बुद्धानुशासनम्All is so, or all is not so, both so and not so, neither so nor not so. This is the Buddha's teaching.一切實非實亦實亦非實
非實非非實是名諸佛法